US confirms, 4.7 mag quake in area. South Korean pres to hold emergency meeting.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1
Printable View
US confirms, 4.7 mag quake in area. South Korean pres to hold emergency meeting.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1
meh, they try anything and China will wipe the floor with them.
The last thing China wants is for North Freaking Korea to get in their way to global prominence.
Kim Jong Ill probably just wants some more money.
I wonder if a test really happened, or if it was an earthquake. Didn't read much of anything convincing. Time to look for more articles.
Let the dominoes fall. Iran is next.
Why would China care if North Korea did anything to Japan or South Korea ?
They might be worried about N. Korea using one on them!Quote:
Originally Posted by word
Because China is the big dog in the region and they want everyone there to know it. All those countries should be afraid of China, not North Korea.Quote:
Originally Posted by word
That and they basically finance the North Korean Government.
north korea knows it has china and russia lookin over its back....north korea has no grudges with china anyway....
china and russia has always veto anything america and its allies tried to bring up in any summits.....
china is just staying low atm and see how japan reacts to north korea, cause we all know japan loves to push chinas buttons when it comes to what happen in the past between the 2 countries during ww2....
just look and see at all the asian neighboring countries who they are going to side with...cause its going to affect them on who they choose and whether or not they get involve into a war or not.
big dog as in claiming shit that dont belong to them? like those damn islands in south china sea? lol.....Quote:
Originally Posted by angrydude
the only thing china has that scares most of its neighbors is nukes and the increase in their navy/air force.....you remove 3 of that, and im sure alot of the smaller countries will give china a run for its money
you and me know, china is going to shit its pants if japan responds to this by doing whatever it takes to protect its people and land from such threats..they could reactivate its army and shit, and they got gundams bitch.
Didn't they already test an extremely weak nuke a couple years ago?
Fail....(but apparently they got it right this time)...right under Cheney's nose too..Quote:
Originally Posted by jman3000
So they can build a nuke but not a hotel?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...yong_Hotel.jpg
They must be pouring every cent of their GDP into that stupid program. Kim Jong Il has to be the biggest fucking douchebag alive (?) in this world.
:rollinQuote:
and they got gundams bitch.
This sucks, S. Koreans are good ppl :(
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/PEK172207.htmQuote:
"The Chinese government is resolutely opposed to the nuclear test by the Democratic People's Republic of Korea," the official Xinhua news agency said, citing the Foreign Ministry and using North Korea's formal name.
:lmao goldQuote:
Originally Posted by TDMVPDPOY
They'll unleash Godzilla and Rodan on shanghai
Well, that's the image China would like to project and I doubt they want North Korea getting in the way.Quote:
Originally Posted by TDMVPDPOY
I'm sure the UN will take care of this.
Nuking orientals is what America does best.........let'em rip.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FaithInOne
I say unleash Japan from their military concessions after WW2 and let the whole region do its best impersonation of the Middle East.
In the end, everyone wins, especially the American manufacturing sector (ie Me).
Nah dude, I need SKorea to be around until I graduate. :ihit
We would have to have something or give something that benefits China immensely before they ever let us do that.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkReign
You mean letting Japan free of their 1940s surrender terms?Quote:
Originally Posted by Cant_Be_Faded
How much of an increase in defense expenditure will this bogeyman create?
Seeing as you can add the world's spending on defense and not even reach what the US spends...Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus Bryant
I expect zero increase. Why doesnt the US have some lackey, rogue state we can prop up right out in the open and give nuclear technology to?
Oh wait, we have one in the region...just take the leash off, for chrissakes.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090527/...koreas_nuclear
N. Korea threatens to attack US, S. Korea warships
Quote:
By HYUNG-JIN KIM, Associated Press Writer Hyung-jin Kim, Associated Press Writer – 30 mins ago
SEOUL, South Korea – North Korea threatened military action Wednesday against U.S. and South Korean warships plying the waters near the Koreas' disputed maritime border, raising the specter of a naval clash just days after the regime's underground nuclear test.
Pyongyang, reacting angrily to Seoul's decision to join an international program to intercept ships suspected of aiding nuclear proliferation, called the move tantamount to a declaration of war.
"Now that the South Korean puppets were so ridiculous as to join in the said racket and dare declare a war against compatriots," North Korea is "compelled to take a decisive measure," the Committee for the Peaceful Reunification of Korea said in a statement carried by state media.
The North Korean army called it a violation of the armistice the two Koreas signed in 1953 to end their three-year war, and said it would no longer honor the treaty.
South Korea's military said Wednesday it was prepared to "respond sternly" to any North Korean provocation.
North Korea's latest belligerence comes as the U.N. Security Council debates how to punish the regime for testing a nuclear bomb Monday in what President Barack Obama called a "blatant violation" of international law.
Ambassadors from the five permanent veto-wielding council members — the United States, Russia, China, Britain and France — as well as Japan and South Korea were working out the details of a new resolution.
The success of any new sanctions would depend on how aggressively China, one of North Korea's only allies, implements them.
"It's not going too far to say that China holds the keys on sanctions," said Kim Sung-han, an international relations professor at Seoul's Korea University.
South Korea, divided from the North by a heavily fortified border, had responded to the nuclear test by joining the Proliferation Security Initiative, a U.S.-led network of nations seeking to stop ships from transporting the materials used in nuclear bombs.
Seoul previously resisted joining the PSI in favor of seeking reconciliation with Pyongyang, but pushed those efforts aside Monday after the nuclear test in the northeast.
North Korea warned Wednesday that any attempt to stop, board or inspect its ships would constitute a "grave violation."
The regime also said it could no longer promise the safety of U.S. and South Korean warships and civilian vessels in the waters near the Korea's western maritime border.
"They should bear in mind that the (North) has tremendous military muscle and its own method of strike able to conquer any targets in its vicinity at one stroke or hit the U.S. on the raw, if necessary," the army said in a statement carried by state media.
The maritime border has long been a flashpoint between the two Koreas. North Korea disputes the line unilaterally drawn by the United Nations at the end of the Koreas' three-year war in 1953, and has demanded it be redrawn further south.
The truce signed in 1953 and subsequent military agreements call for both sides to refrain from warfare, but doesn't cover the waters off the west coast.
North Korea has used the maritime border dispute to provoke two deadly naval skirmishes — in 1999 and 2002.
On Wednesday, the regime promised "unimaginable and merciless punishment" for anyone daring to challenge its ships.
Pyongyang also reportedly restarted its weapons-grade nuclear plant, South Korean media said.
The Chosun Ilbo newspaper said U.S. spy satellites detected signs of steam at the North's Yongbyon nuclear complex, an indication it may have started reprocessing nuclear fuel. The report, which could not be confirmed, quoted an unidentified government official. South Korea's Yonhap news agency also carried a similar report.
The move would be a major setback for efforts aimed at getting North Korea to disarm.
North Korea had stopped reprocessing fuel rods as part of an international deal. In 2007, it agreed to disable the Yongbyon reactor in exchange for aid and demolished a cooling tower at the complex.
The North has about 8,000 spent fuel rods which, if reprocessed, could allow it to harvest 13 to 18 pounds (six to eight kilograms) of plutonium — enough to make at least one nuclear bomb, experts said. North Korea is believed to have enough plutonium for at least a half dozen atomic bombs.
Further ratcheting up tensions, North Korea test-fired five short-range missiles over the past two days, South Korean officials confirmed.
Russia's foreign minister said world powers must be firm with North Korea but take care to avoid inflaming tensions further.
The world "must not rush to punish North Korea just for punishment's sake," Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said, adding that Russia wants a Security Council resolution that will help restart stalled six-nation talks over North Korea's nuclear programs and will not provoke Pyongyang into even more aggressive activity.
South Korean President Lee Myung-bak urged officials to "remain calm" in the face of North Korean threats, said Lee Dong-kwan, his spokesman.
Pyongyang isn't afraid of any repercussions for its actions, a North Korean newspaper, the Minju Joson, said Wednesday.
"It is a laughable delusion for the United States to think that it can get us to kneel with sanctions," it said in an editorial. "We've been living under U.S. sanctions for decades, but have firmly safeguarded our ideology and system while moving our achievements forward. The U.S. sanctions policy toward North Korea is like striking a rock with a rotten egg."
___ Associated Press writer Steve Gutterman in Moscow and Edith M. Lederer at the United Nations contributed to this report.
I wonder. Do liberals still want us to stop building the Missile Defense System?
It would be nice if they stopped faking the star wars tests.
We understand it's a difficult system to create -- no need to lie about the progress.
I'm sorry your are a conspiracy theorist in faking results.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
It was an impossible system to achieve when it was first conceived. Very practical now with modern CPU's, tracking systems, etc. We were lucky to have what, 8 mhz 8 bit processors then, right? Now we are in the GHZ ranges, and nuclear hardened chips. State of the art is probable 50,000 times faster when comparing MFLOPs, or better.
No, the results were very much faked in the past.
Last I heard, they were having trouble even making good target rockets. Maybe we should buy a few from North Korea.
OK, all I could find was that one system made by TRW had falsified data. What about the other, how many dozens of systems? How many other contractors?Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, etc.
Link please.
Well there was at least one tests in which the target had a homing beacon on it so the missile wouldn't miss it. I remember that quite clearly. Now our target missiles fail so often we can't even get to the point of actually testing the system satisfactorily.
That's odd. Everything is suppose to work on the first attempt and be easy.
When they faked the test it did.
Go figure.
everytime they need a handout (food, money, medical aid etc...) they do something like this to attract attention.
this is their only recourse to survival, they know if they act upon their 'nuclear ambitions' they will get squashed like a bug and no one will give them anymore handouts.
its all about the handouts, they make no money otherwise.
The current system being depolyed in Poland shoots down missiles while in boost phase. That's why it has to be in eastern Europe. The star wars hoax was a space based system that supposedly shot down missiles while in the ballistic phase of lower orbit with 'lasers'.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
http://furmigowisky.files.wordpress....evil_laser.jpg
We're going to knock out North Korean missiles headed over the Pacific with missiles from Poland?
The rigged beacon test was conducted in 2001 using the system you described.
Nice pic though.
so is the space war system inferrior to chinas system that it shot down one of its satellites last year?
hey can you guys also post links of the failed test....i would like to read further into that since you clowns are basing one in australia also....
Yeah, I muddied the waters using the star wars moniker.
Apologies.
Nope. That only deals with Russian missiles. There was a platform built in the northern pacific for missile defense. I don't know what it's status is, but what China and N. Korea or anyone in the pacific can throw at us is nothing compared to the Russians. I think the Chinese can only reach the western US as is and the accuracy is questionable. Between us, the French, the Brits...we can deliver a lot of nuclear weapons anywhere on the globe, on target and on time, like UPS.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
So numerous examples of what you're talking about shouldn't be hard for you to find and post up.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
The rigged missile defense testQuote:
Originally Posted by Obstructed_View
The Latest Star Wars Woes: Launching Fake Targets
You're welcome.
Egh. I would be so pro-defense shield if that shit actually worked.
so what is the problem with the system? compared to the system in fighter jets locking onto its enemy and firing the missile with a direct hit? wouldnt it be the same system or its a revamp?Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
The first link is an editorial, where someone comes to the conclusion that the results are being faked.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
I found this quote on PBSabout those same tests. There appears to be no attempt to hide the fact that there was a GPS in the target, and by the July test they actually weren't relying on the GPS for the entire test.
The second link you obviously didn't even read because the "fake targets" they are referring to are the practice targets, as in "fake Russian missile". It has nothing to do with falsifying results.Quote:
The October test did validate the hit-to-kill concept itself, but not the overall viability of the NMD system. This is because the test was highly controlled and unrealistic. For example, in order to ensure that the interceptor and incoming missile would collide, a beacon linking the target missile to the Global Positioning Satellite (GPs) network was used to help guide the interceptor in the midcourse.
At the time of the October test, three more flight intercept tests were planned, each one more complicated than the last in order to provide more and more realistic criteria. Under the original plans, all three would have been conducted successfully by now. That has not happened. The two tests following the October 1999 test failed. The next one in the series was delayed for months but was conducted on July 14, 2001, again successfully demonstrating hit-to-kill -- although other aspects of the test were problematic, and an active radar beacon on the target was used (instead of GPS) to help guide the interceptor during an early portion of its flight.
You're welcome.
It's complicated, it's expensive, it's never been done before and it's being developed by the government. Aside from that, everything's fine. I've certainly got no problem with everyone watching what they're doing. It's my tax money too.Quote:
Originally Posted by TDMVPDPOY
Link please...Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
Wow...Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
Two examples out of how many designs?
Now the GPS would be to know where the target is, for the camera to track the kill. not to hit it with the defense missile. A GPS is only so accurate, especially circa 2001.
As for the rockets, not sure.
Also keep in mind, you learn from failures. We never have a 100% record in research and development. I have four years of experience in that field myself.
Please read the links. There are no examples provided. In fact, do you even bother to read the threads? Look four posts above you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
at least we know North Korea has been faking it.
Quote:
In a statement on its website, the US Northern Command said North Korea launched a three-stage Taepodong-2 missile at 0230 GMT.
"Stage one of the missile fell into the Sea of Japan/East Sea. The remaining stages along with the payload itself landed in the Pacific Ocean.
"No object entered orbit and no debris fell on Japan."
US military authorities "assessed the space launch vehicle as not a threat to North America or Hawaii and took no action in response to this launch", the statement added.
Earlier, state media in North Korea said that the "Kwangmyongsong-2" satellite had been placed in orbit.
The satellite was transmitting data and the "Song of General Kim Il-sung" and "Song of General Kim Jong-il" - references to the late founder of North Korea and his son, the current leader - the report said.
The BBC's John Sudworth in Seoul says a failure would seriously detract from North Korea's ability to exploit the propaganda value of the launch, although it may never admit it to its own people.
In a previous satellite launch attempt in 1998, North Korea said it was sending up a device that would orbit the world transmitting revolutionary melodies.
It claimed this was also successful but the launch is believed to have been a failure as no trace of the satellite was ever found.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asi...ic/7984254.stm
fyi
I recommend reading all 28 pages of CDI Senior Advisor Philip Coyle's testimony to the Subcommittee on Strategic Forces of the House Armed Forces Committee on "The Future of Missile Defense Testing" on Feb. 25, 2009.....Quote:
.....Introduction
There is a troublesome lack of clarity in public discourse regarding both the rationale for and the technical progress toward an effective U.S. missile defense network. Quite simply, the public statements made by Pentagon officials and contractors have often been at variance with the facts at hand. It is difficult to separate programmatic spin from genuine progress. In particular, the missile defense program has made claims that have not been demonstrated through realistic testing......
http://www.cdi.org/pdfs/CoyleHASCfull2_25_091.pdf
but I'm betting you won't, so to summarize:
Quote:
In his testimony, Coyle outlines steps that the MDA must take to establish an effective U.S. missile defense network. Coyle argues that the current systems lack the ability to deal with decoys and countermeasures, lack demonstrated effectiveness under realistic operational conditions, and are not able to prove their ability to handle attacks involving multiple missiles. He proposes dramatically increased and more thorough testing to clarify the claims previously made by Pentagon officials and contractors.
http://www.cdi.org/program/document....intversion.cfm
Except it was hidden until weeks after the fact. You would have known that had you read the article that quoted a Reuters report.Quote:
Originally Posted by Obstructed_View
I told you exactly what it was about in two separate posts.Quote:
The second link you obviously didn't even read because the "fake targets" they are referring to are the practice targets, as in "fake Russian missile". It has nothing to do with falsifying results.
You're welcome.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
And of course WC already brought up the TRW issue. Even you could google "fake missile test" and find all the information your little heart desired.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChumpDumper
:lol That's gold.Quote:
Originally Posted by Obstructed_View
So you posted one editorial based on a report you failed to link, as well as another link that had nothing to do with the information I asked for, but had something to do with a throwaway comment you made earlier. That's more than you usually provide before declaring yourself the champ. Well done, Chump.
I did read the threads. I understand not only what a GPS is, but being a Microwave Communications Technician, I understand how they work, and somewhat, their limitations. I was attempting to explain why a GPS back then could not be used as a cheat.Quote:
Originally Posted by Obstructed_View
My point is that the GPS could not be a beacon for the defense system, but is accurate enough to guide telephoto camera from miles away, to document the test.
The acknowledgment that a GPS transponder was in the system does not mean it was used to cheat the test. In fact, the accuracy of 2001 GPS systems would make it unreliable. No electronics engineer would be dumb enough to use a GPS moving so fast as a location devise for precision targeting.
With a GPS, you are calculating a position, using relative distances between satellites, and the timecodes they use. It is not triangulation, and requires four received satellite signals to calculate position and height. Computers were not fast enough to compute position of a target moving. When you look at the fact the target is probably moving 1,000 to 2,000 ft. per second, and how many wavelengths of microwave signal now is shifted with the Doppler effect... Now apply the trigonometry of the signals originating from various moving satellites and their doppler effect... Now keep in mind also, the GPS system operates at 1.57542 GHz and 1.2276 GHZ. A wavelength is 24.4 cm and 19 cm respectively (11.5" and 9".)
What did they do. Place super computers in each target to make accurate enough to be hit by the other missile? In about 2001, the military I think was limited to about 10 meters with the GPS system, for fixed locations. Good luck with a moving target.
The first article gives a false perception of what is possible. If they were to cheat the test, a simple homing beacon would be used, that would allow simple triangulation.
The trick to hitting a missile with a missile, is proper course corrections with the changing wind velocities, and wind shears. The system needs to be tuned to see ahead with something similar to Doppler radar, but will see moving dry air. This is necessary to make timely course corrections rather than being suddenly blown several yards off course. That means a lidar, or something more advanced, at a frequency that the receiver will see the Doppler shift of the reflected light off of the nitrogen or oxygen. This alone requires computation power not available in the 80's and probably not the 90's. We surely have it today. 2001 was probably borderline for reliability.
As for mid course, assuming GPS was used for that, it simple means they didn't develop that part of the system, and were demonstrating the targeting accuracy at detonation. I would say there is little concern about testing to get the missile in the general area. That part's easy. Hitting it's the hard part.
You asked for information. I gave it to you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Obstructed_View
It was not a throwaway comment. I made the comment twice and you got indignant at me for your failure to actually read the thread. That's your problem, not mine.
I said I was going off personal recollection.
My recollection was accurate.
There was nothing to win here, but it was indeed pretty well done by me. Thanks.